Questions of the Day

Why should any Republican view Harry Reid as an honest interlocutor given Reid’s lies about Mitt Romney’s tax returns? Why shouldn’t Reid’s be on the receiving end of political retribution as swiftly as possible given his many unkindnesses towards the truth during the presidential campaign? And finally, why should Barack Obama be trusted, given that he turned a not-so-blind-and-very-approving eye towards Reid’s demagoguery during the campaign?

  1. Herbert Woodbery

    Did I miss something? Did mitt release his tax returns to prove Harry wrong?

  2. Lavaux

    We are in a new political era. Truth is irrelevant even if it does exist, which is a controversial idea. There is no reliable record of public acts and statements, there are no reliable record-keepers, there are none to prosecute public malfeasances, and even if there were, most voters would not care. And without accountability, trust is also off of the table.

    I recall a time when people trusted government. Times change.

  3. Nick Stuart

    We are in the land of “Just Make Stuff Up.”

  4. Pejman Yousefzadeh
    C

    Did I miss something? Did Harry Reid actually cite a source–a living, breathing one with a name–to back his scurrilous charges?

    Herbert Woodbery: Did I miss something? Did mitt release his tax returns to prove Harry wrong? · 2 hours ago

  5. BrentB67

    We shouldn’t trust them, but since we failed to put up a credible alternative to either of them Obama easily won re-election and Reid’s party gained seats in the Senate. I expect they will have their way until at least November 2014, but given that the most popular post on the Member Feed at this moment is that Jeb Bush is thinking about running for President I suspect Democrats may have their way for many years beyond 2014.

  6. The Annapolitan

    The Re-elect Obama campaign was likely the most cynically contrived (“kill Mott Romney”) and dishonestly run campaign since the 1800′s. His 2008 campaign was equally cynical and vacuous, based entirely on tearing down the then current president and building up a Messiah image in Obama, and playing the race card when it was needed, or not. Is there seriously a question whether we can trust him since he did not refute Harry Reid?

  7. concerned citizen
    Herbert Woodbery: Did I miss something? Did Harry Reid actually cite a source–a living, breathing one with a name–to back his scurrilous charges?No he didn’t, but mitt had ample opportunity to prove Harry was wrong ( or lying) and chose not to. On what basis do make the scurrilous charge that Harry was lying? · 1 hour ago

    I’m having a hard time taking your comments seriously.  So, you are actually saying that under the Obama administration, people are now  guilty until proven innocent?  Really?  Anyone can just make any asinine charge against you, and if you don’t find a way to “prove them wrong” then it sticks?   Please just stop and think about what that would imply for every American.

  8. Esau
    Herbert Woodbery: Did I miss something? Did Harry Reid actually cite a source–a living, breathing one with a name–to back his scurrilous charges?No he didn’t, but mitt had ample opportunity to prove Harry was wrong ( or lying) and chose not to. On what basis do make the scurrilous charge that Harry was lying? · 1 hour ago

    This comment is extraordinarily uninformed. Anyone can review the two tax returns actually released and find ample evidence of having paid taxes in years past, including the 10 year lookback on all claims for credits for foreign incomes taxes paid. People need to stop relying on the idiotic commentary slung about by biased and ignorant commentators and go the source itself.

    Everyone (including Reid himself) knew he was lying; and he continued to repeat the lie. I don’t know Mr. Woodberry from Adam, but if I accused him of engaging in a course of philandering over the last ten years, would he feel the least obliged to prove his chastity and loyalty to Mrs. Woodberry, and would any third party hold him to such obligation, based simply and solely upon my accusation?

  9. Esau
    Herbert Woodbery: Did I miss something? Did mitt release his tax returns to prove Harry wrong? · 6 hours ago

    I suspect you’ve missed quite a bit over the last several years.

  10. Esau

    The problem with Harry Reid and the other scoundrels among Senate Democrats is not their behavior. They do whatever they can get away with. Scoundrels were always thus. The problem is that they are never called to account by their colleagues.

    For some reason, GOP Senators consider engaging in political fisticuffs beneath their exalted station in life. They are forever interested in the comity of the Senate, as if such a thing existed . . . ever.

    Senator Reid should be treated to a verbal pummeling on the floor of the Senate by one or other Republican Senator every single day the body is in session. He should be showed up for the corrupt, venal, lying gutter snipe that he is. All his crooked land deals should be set forth in glorious technicolor detail in the Congressional Record. Every sleazy association should be exposed.

    But the Pubs won’t do it. Every single one suffers from Cryptorchidism.

  11. Joker

    Esau you are correct. Rimney’s taxes and the budget failure should be mentioned by every Republican who opens his mouth on the floor or in committee. His inexcusable behavior cannot be justified even by the MSM. Front and center.

    And just in general, I want to hear that the president simply froze when called upon to take action in Bengazi.  That’s the most likely explanation and until our Most Influential Marxist has a full on press conference to answer questions, I think the game requires us to go on offense. He gagged, that’s why he would not man up and explain the horrendous outcome.

    No reason to give him the benefit of the doubt.

  12. Macsen

    They shouldn’t. He should. He shouldn’t. Next question?

  13. Herbert Woodbery

    There is a diiference between an unproven allegation and one proven to be wrong or a lie. In this case the actual allegation was one that would have been easy to disprove. It wasn’t. Reid said he was relying on info from a third party, Ie he had no direct knowledge. It’s pretty hardball political rhetoric, but both sides engage in it (remember the birther allegations, and the Islamist allegations) against Obama. To feign outrage over it is wasted energy.

  14. M1919A4

    We must remember that a Republican member of the House or Senate engages not only a member of the other party but also that member’s party in its entirety and  the united forces of the Tank Corps (the so-called Mainstream Media).

    BUT, that is no reason not to take them on; one simply has to be certain of one’s facts and to be unrelenting and precise in one’s language.  It seemed to me at the time, that Mr.. Romney could have shown his returns to someone in one in each of the Houses of Congress (say, Jeff Sessions and Daryl Issa, people of determination and integrity) and let them tell Harry Reid publicly on the floor of each House that he was wrong and call a him a liar if he persisted.  Apparently, that never occurred to Romney’s minders.

    “Comity” and “going along” to achieve it pays a very poor return.  Republicans seem to value it, but the Democrats do not.  

    With such snakes as Reid, Schumer, Lehey, Levin, Durbin, and Rockefeller, making the running for the Democrats, I see no good in accommodation and discount the worth of any promise Reid and company make.

  15. Mothership_Greg
    Herbert Woodbery: There is a diiference between an unproven allegation and one proven to be wrong or a lie. In this case the actual allegation was one that would have been easy to disprove. It wasn’t. Reid said he was relying on info from a third party, Ie he had no direct knowledge. It’s pretty hardball political rhetoric, but both sides engage in it (remember the birther allegations, and the Islamist allegations) against Obama. To feign outrage over it is wasted energy. · 14 hours ago

    How’s about when Reid said that Romney had “sullied Mormonism”?  Or when he said that Mitt’s deceased father would be ashamed of him?  Here’s a quote for you:

    Go [CoC violation] yourself.

    Now, don’t go getting all offended, a third party said that to me.  I’m just passing the message along.  I’m sure you won’t feign any outrage and we’ll be able to get along just fine because I’m only engaging in “hardcore Internet rhetoric”.

    Dumb.

  16. Herbert Woodbery

    Did I miss something? Did Harry Reid actually cite a source–a living, breathing one with a name–to back his scurrilous charges?No he didn’t, but mitt had ample opportunity to prove Harry was wrong ( or lying) and chose not to. On what basis do make the scurrilous charge that Harry was lying?

  17. Eeyore

    “Why should any Republican view Harry Reid as an honest interlocutor…”

    I don’t think “honest interlocutor” is a particularly apt phrase in the world of Congressional leadership. I can’t remember, or find, which race, but when Bronze (Go-Along-To-Get-Along) Boehner beat out a moderate and a conservative (Jeff Flake?) in an actual contest for Leader, it seemed obvious that power was the only issue at stake in the Leadership, not ethics. 

    So, no offense, sir, but it seems in this light that your questions become more rhetorical than…actionable?

  18. Xennady

    Any politically effective or even potentially threatening Republican leader gets the full Alinsky treatment until they are hounded out of office. Newt Gingrich, Tom Delay, Sarah Palin all come to mind. And Marco Rubio seems to be the next target.

    Thus I find it interesting that both Boehner and McConnell manage to spend their time as GOP leaders with nary a complaint from the democrats. Basically, the left is quite happy with the present GOP leadership and allows them to remain.

    Therefore I conclude that Harry Reid will face nary a hint of a problem in the senate, and the GOP will do nothing at all to make him or his party pay any sort of price for their conduct.

    I might say again, or still, or of course, as this never changes and the GOP never actually manages to be effective.

    It just manages to be pitiful.